Preexistence (Part 2)

This topic contains 8,160 replies, has 49 voices, and was last updated by  t8 1 month, 2 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #225828
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    This is a continuation of the topic Preexistence (Part 1).

    #225830
     Ed J 
    Participant
    • Topics started 155
    • Total replies 27,980

    Hi Everyone,

                            Our Preexistence

    Yes, we all preexisted our physical flesh!
    Thanks very much for your concern in this matter!
    2Tm.1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling,
    not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace,
    which was given [[[us]]] in Christ Jesus before the world began, (John 15:27)

                           “The Word” in us!

    John 15:27 And ye also shall bear witness (by the HolySpirit),
    because [[[ye]]] have been with me from the beginning.
    Acts 12:24 But “The word” of God grew and multiplied.

                             More evidence:  

    Jer.1:5 Before I(YHVH) formed thee in the belly I knew thee;
    and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee,
    and I(YHVH) ordained thee(Jeremiah) a prophet unto the nations.

    Jude:1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you,
    feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of
    winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

    God bless
    Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
    http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

    #225831
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    JA:

    Quote
    Mike,

    Only two questions…

    Jesus is directly created from God, you say,…so he is God from God.

    And, you say, God created the Angels through Jesus.

    1) What higher glory can a God from God have?

    2) If Jesus is God from God, how would anyone want to compare him to that which he had a hand in creating – Angels.
    (Is the Potter compared to the Pots he created?
    Is the Potter said to be greater than the pots he created?
    Is the Potter put in authority over the pots he created?
    Is God said to be greater than the Angels?
    IS God said to be greater than Jesus (Note  – Not Jesus is NOT as Great as God…!))

    (These questions will be raised again)

    Hi JA,

    1)  Jesus is not “God from God” anymore than your son would be “JA from JA”.  None of King David's sons were “King David from King David” either.  Nor would the President's son be “The President from The President”.

    Jesus is the Son of God.  God is THE ALMIGHTY ONE.  Jesus is a mighty one in his own right, but not THE ALMIGHTY ONE.  And since you know “a god” means “a mighty one”, I don't understand the dilemma here.  Jesus is “a mighty one” who is the Son of THE ALMIGHTY ONE.

    2)  Jehovah is “compared” to angels, and so are men.  I don't get your point here.

    peace and love,
    mike

    #225832
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    There are 2 ways in which you can use the word God (theos).

    Qualitatively and as an identifier.

    If you say theos from theos in quality or nature then that would not be the same as THEOS from THEOS which would mean GOD from GOD which means we now have 2 Gods.

    Theos as in THE THEOS or Theos is God unless it talks about another God such as God of this age.

    Surely if Jesus was the first work and came from God himself, then that would make him theos in nature.

    Scripture talks about many gods (theos) but says that there is only one Almighty Theos IDENTIFIED as the Father.
    So yes there are many who partake in divine nature, but there is only one is the Divine.

    Similarly (in a language sense) there is only one who is THE DEVIL or Devil, yet there are many devils including Judas who was called a devil. So again in identity there is only one, in nature or quality there are many.

    This understanding clears up most of the debates in this topic and the Trinity topic. But many seem to ignore this. Yet this is how scripture is constructed. It is there for all to see if they want.

    #225838
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 21 2010,09:18)
    Scripture talks about many gods (theos) but says that there is only one Almighty Theos IDENTIFIED as the Father.
    So yes there are many who partake in divine nature, but there is only one is the Divine.


    Hi t8,

    We've discussed this briefly before, and I'm still not on board with this “nature” thing.  Idols were “gods” to many people, yet an idol doesn't “partake in divine nature”, does it?

    And Jesus was called THE begotten god in John 1:18.  That doesn't imply “nature” or “qualifyer” to me, but an “identity”.

    God simply implies “a mighty one”.  And many can and have been INDENTIFIED as “mighty ones”.  And not all of them have a “divine nature”.

    But we do agree that in the midst of many “mighty ones”, there is only ONE “ALMIGHTY ONE”.

    peace and love,
    mike

    #225842
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    Mike.

    There are many identified as theos that is not in a nature or qualitative sense, that is true.
    e.g., idols are in identity false gods. Satan is in identity the God of this age.
    So yes all gods being identified are false with the exception of the one true God.
    So yes there are many gods, but there is only one true God.

    Other mentions of theos where God the Father is not be talked of, and where it is not a false God can be explained as theos in a qualitative or nature sense. Such as when Jesus said, “ye are thoes”. He was talking to those who held Moses seat and therefore their ministry qualified them as “theos”. They were not false gods, even though they didn't recognize Jesus.

    To confirm that, we have the Greek language which uses the definite article to identify and lack of it to qualify.

    So when Jesus said, “ye are gods”. You can bet that he didn't say, “Yes are THE God”.

    Does that make more sense now?

    What part doesn't?

    #225843
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,10:04)
    God simply implies “a mighty one”.  And many can and have been INDENTIFIED as “mighty ones”.  And not all of them have a “divine nature”.


    Did you know that there is no indefinite article 'a' in Greek. It is added in by translators to make the sentence legible in English. So when Jesus said “one of you is a devil” he was actually saying “one of you is devil” and he was qualifying Judas as having the nature or characteristics of the Devil. He wasn't actually saying that he was the Devil or even a devil/demon.

    #225845
     terraricca 
    Participant
    • Topics started 67
    • Total replies 28,224

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,17:04)

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 21 2010,09:18)
    Scripture talks about many gods (theos) but says that there is only one Almighty Theos IDENTIFIED as the Father.
    So yes there are many who partake in divine nature, but there is only one is the Divine.


    Hi t8,

    We've discussed this briefly before, and I'm still not on board with this “nature” thing.  Idols were “gods” to many people, yet an idol doesn't “partake in divine nature”, does it?

    And Jesus was called THE begotten god in John 1:18.  That doesn't imply “nature” or “qualifyer” to me, but an “identity”.

    God simply implies “a mighty one”.  And many can and have been INDENTIFIED as “mighty ones”.  And not all of them have a “divine nature”.

    But we do agree that in the midst of many “mighty ones”, there is only ONE “ALMIGHTY ONE”.

    peace and love,
    mike


    Mike
    the two natures;
    i understand “nature” like in your nature,this would say in your human nature,but it also imply in your character,
    so i believe that many are flipping from one to the other,

    idols they are made in stone(or other substance) they have a nature of stone,(or other substance)
    since they do not think for themself they do not have the other nature,

    all creation dwells in is own nature according to what god has given ,and i think it is also the same with Christ

    since the angels, human and the son of God are created with freewill to serve God or not, i would be inclined to say that it is there character THAT would be there nature ,and not there structure,reason for structures do not proclaim God glory,

    and so we should pay more attention to the character of those who are created to glorify God name than looking at dead matter or structures used by the characters.

    Pierre

    #225846
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,10:04)
    And Jesus was called THE begotten god in John 1:18.  That doesn't imply “nature” or “qualifyer” to me, but an “identity”.


    Mike look at the Greek.

    18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him .

    the only begotten Son part is the monogenes.

    The definite article precedes monogenes.

    Therefore it is identifying him as THE Only begotten son, not as THE Begotten God.

    The word for son is 'huios' and it is not using the word 'theos'.

    #225848
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    Do you have any other verses that you think do not fit what I am saying?

    #225850
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 21 2010,10:59)
    The word for son is 'huios' and it is not using the word 'theos'.


    Hi t8,

    This info is from NETNotes:

    Joh 1:181tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh” qeo”, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh” Juio”, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C3 Θ Ψ Ë1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì75 א1 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì66 א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo” hn Jo logo”) means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

    http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Joh&chapter=1&verse=18#

    Have fun with all that mumbo-jumbo! :)

    mike

    #225851
     terraricca 
    Participant
    • Topics started 67
    • Total replies 28,224

    T8

    can we bring a copy of all our scriptures that we have collected right here in the begining so we do not have to search for them in a other place

    pierre

    #225853
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 21 2010,11:00)
    Do you have any other verses that you think do not fit what I am saying?


    Hi t8,

    Here are just a few.

    John 8:44
    You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

    Acts 28:6 NIV
    6The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead, but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.

    Acts 12:22
    They shouted, “This is the voice of a god, not of a man.”

    1 Corinthians 8:7
    But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.

    1 Corinthians 14:33
    For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.

    While the Greeks did not use the indefinite article “a”, English translators add it in each and every time it is necessary for us to read the passage sensibly.  That is………every time but one – John 1:1.

    You seem to be picking and choosing here t8.  When in reference to an idol, then you say the word “a” should be added, but understood it refers to “A” false god.

    But when used of others besides idols, you want to leave the “A” out and call it “nature” or “a qualifyer”.  

    So was Herod speaking like “A” god, or did he have the nature of God Himself?  Did the people on Malta think Paul was “a god”, or that he had the nature of God Himself?

    And what about 1 Cor?  Does it mean God is not “A” God of disorder, or that God is not “the nature of God” of disorder?

    And which one makes more sense when Paul calls Satan the god of this age?  Is Paul calling Satan “A” god or mighty one, or is he saying he has the “nature of God”?

    The way I see it, the English translators are right to add the “A” in all of the above scriptures so they make sense to us.  It just makes me wonder why the NWT seems to be the only translation that is not afraid to stick with the formula and also add it in John 1:1.  Actually, it doesn't make me wonder at all – we both know that “the Word was God” makes a much more compelling case for the trinitarians.

    As far as our discussion goes, if you agree that the above scriptures should have the “A” added, then why would you just assume for some reason that it SHOULDN'T also be added in John 1?

    peace and love,
    mike

    #225854
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 21 2010,11:26)
    T8

    can we bring a copy of all our scriptures that we have collected right here in the begining so we do not have to search for them in a other place

    pierre


    Hey Pierre,

    I'll add the last few in by order and post it here for us. I'm sure t8 won't mind.

    mike

    #225857
     terraricca 
    Participant
    • Topics started 67
    • Total replies 28,224

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,18:38)

    Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 21 2010,11:26)
    T8

    can we bring a copy of all our scriptures that we have collected right here in the begining so we do not have to search for them in a other place

    pierre


    Hey Pierre,

    I'll add the last few in by order and post it here for us.  I'm sure t8 won't mind.

    mike


    mike

    thanks brother

    pierre

    #225859
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 80
    • Total replies 25,176

    These scriptures that teach the pre-existence of Jesus have been compiled by Irene (Baker), Pierre (Terrarica), Wm (Seeking Truth), Mike (mikeboll64) and t8.

    There are currently 48 scriptures or passages listed.

    Proverbs 8:22-31 NIV
    22 “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works,
    before his deeds of old;
    23 I was formed long ages ago,
    at the very beginning, when the world came to be.
    24 When there were no watery depths, I was given birth,
    when there were no springs overflowing with water;
    25 before the mountains were settled in place,
    before the hills, I was given birth,
    26 before he made the world or its fields
    or any of the dust of the earth.
    27 I was there when he set the heavens in place,
    when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep,
    28 when he established the clouds above
    and fixed securely the fountains of the deep,
    29 when he gave the sea its boundary
    so the waters would not overstep his command,
    and when he marked out the foundations of the earth.
    30 Then I was constantly at his side.
    I was filled with delight day after day,
    rejoicing always in his presence,
    31 rejoicing in his whole world
    and delighting in mankind.

    Proverbs 30:4 NIV
    4 Who has gone up to heaven and come down?
    Whose hands have gathered up the wind?
    Who has wrapped up the waters in a cloak?
    Who has established all the ends of the earth?
    What is his name, and what is the name of his son?
    Surely you know!

    Micah 5:2 NIV
    2 “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
    though you are small among the clans of Judah,
    out of you will come for me
    one who will be ruler over Israel,
    whose origins are from of old,
    from ancient times.”

    Isaiah 11:1 NIV
    A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.

    Isaiah 11:10 NIV
    In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious.

    Matthew 22:41-46 NIV
    41While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42″What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?”
    “The son of David,” they replied.
    43He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him 'Lord'? For he says,
    44″ 'The Lord said to my Lord:
    “Sit at my right hand
    until I put your enemies
    under your feet.” ' 45If then David calls him 'Lord,' how can he be his son?” 46No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.

    John 1:1-3 NWT
    In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

    John 1:9-12 NIV
    9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—

    John 1:14 NIV
    14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the only begotten, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

    John 1:15 NWT
    15 (John bore witness about him, yes, he actually cried out—this was the one who said [it]—saying: “The one coming behind me has advanced in front of me, because he existed before me.”)

    John 3:13 NIV
    13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.

    John 3:16-19 NIV
    16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

    John 5:19-20 NIV
    19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed.

    John 6:32-33 NIV
    32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”

    John 6:35 NIV
    35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

    John 6:38 NIV
    38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.

    John 6:41-42 NIV
    41 At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”

    John 6:46 NIV
    No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

    John 6:48-51 NIV
    48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

    John 6:62 NIV
    62What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!

    John 8:12 NIV
    When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

    John 8:23 NIV
    23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

    John 8:38 NIV
    38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.”

    John 8:42 NET
    Jesus replied, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come from God and am now here. I have not come on my own initiative, but he sent me.”

    John 8:58 NWT
    58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”

    John 9:5 NIV
    While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

    John 16:28 NIV
    “I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”

    John 17:5 NRSV
    So now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world existed.

    Romans 1:3 NIV
    regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David,

    Romans 8:3 NIV
    For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering.

    Romans 9:5 NASB
    whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ accord
    ing to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.

    1 Corinthians 8:6 NIV
    6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

    1 Corinthians 10:3-4 NIV
    3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

    1 Corinthians 11:3 NIV
    3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and the head of Christ is God.

    1 Corinthians 15:47 NIV
    47The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.

    Galatians 4:4-5 NIV
    4But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.

    Philippians 2:6-8 NIV
    6Who, being in the form of God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
    7but made himself nothing,
    taking the form of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.
    8And being found in appearance as a man,
    he humbled himself
    and became obedient to death—
    even death on a cross!

    Colossians 1:15-17 NIV
    15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

    1 Timothy 3:16 NWT
    16 Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in [the] world, was received up in glory.’

    Hebrews 1:1-2 NIV
    1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

    Hebrews 1:10 NIV
    10He also says,
    “In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
    and the heavens are the work of your hands.

    Hebrews 2:14 NIV
    Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—

    Hebrews 10:5 NIV
    5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:

    “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
    but a body you prepared for me;

    1 John 1:1 NIV
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.

    1 John 2:12-13 NIV
    12I write to you, dear children,
    because your sins have been forgiven on account of his name.
    13I write to you, fathers,
    because you have known him who is from the beginning.

    Jude 1:25 NIV
    25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

    Revelation 3:14 NWT
    14 “And to the angel of the congregation in La‧o‧di‧ce′a write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God,

    Revelation 22:16 NIV
    “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

    #225866
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    Just Askin,

    You wrote:

    Quote

    Kerwin,

    Maybe it's just a slip but 'Jesus is evil'

    No, Kerwin. Jesus, as man, had the POTENTIAL to do Evil, to BE Sinful…but he resisted.

    I stated it correctly but meant it differently than you understood it.  We are actually stating the same thing as I was Jesus’ nature as in his human nature is evil because it is like the nature of all human beings as it is without God.   On the other hand he also had the righteous or good nature of God that is the result of living by the Spirit.  He was obviously not referring to the Spirit as it is part of God and not man.

    #225868
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    Mike Boll,

    You wrote:

    Quote

    Kerwin says if his mother made him a gift before he was born, then he could speak about the gift “HE HAD” before he was born.  I could see him saying, “Where is the gift you made for me BEFORE I was born?”, but I doubt anyone in that situation would say “the gift I HAD before I was born”.  A person is not an “I” until they exist as a person, so therefore a person cannot possibly “HAVE” a possession until they exist as a person.

    Do you not see the illogical and far reaching things people must come up with just to make a clearly spoken sentence by Jesus not mean what it very clearly says?  Why the mystery and the secret hidden meanings?  Why can't it just clearly mean what it clearly says?

    It is not illogical to use words different than Mike Boll has been taught is appropriate.  Culture influences the way we choose to word our sentences and non-English speakers will use the sentence structure that they have learned sometimes even when speaking English.  Those speaking common Greek are non-English speakers.  I am not even sure I structure my words as have been taught is proper.

    Jesus tells you why he chooses to use mystery and secret meanings.  Do you remember where he does?

    #225875
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 21 2010,11:35)

    Quote (t8 @ Nov. 21 2010,11:00)
    Do you have any other verses that you think do not fit what I am saying?


    Hi t8,

    Here are just a few.

    John 8:44
    You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

    Acts 28:6 NIV
    6The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead, but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god.

    Acts 12:22
    They shouted, “This is the voice of a god, not of a man.”

    1 Corinthians 8:7
    But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.

    1 Corinthians 14:33
    For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.

    While the Greeks did not use the indefinite article “a”, English translators add it in each and every time it is necessary for us to read the passage sensibly.  That is………every time but one – John 1:1.

    You seem to be picking and choosing here t8.  When in reference to an idol, then you say the word “a” should be added, but understood it refers to “A” false god.

    But when used of others besides idols, you want to leave the “A” out and call it “nature” or “a qualifyer”.  

    So was Herod speaking like “A” god, or did he have the nature of God Himself?  Did the people on Malta think Paul was “a god”, or that he had the nature of God Himself?

    And what about 1 Cor?  Does it mean God is not “A” God of disorder, or that God is not “the nature of God” of disorder?

    And which one makes more sense when Paul calls Satan the god of this age?  Is Paul calling Satan “A” god or mighty one, or is he saying he has the “nature of God”?

    The way I see it, the English translators are right to add the “A” in all of the above scriptures so they make sense to us.  It just makes me wonder why the NWT seems to be the only translation that is not afraid to stick with the formula and also add it in John 1:1.  Actually, it doesn't make me wonder at all – we both know that “the Word was God” makes a much more compelling case for the trinitarians.

    As far as our discussion goes, if you agree that the above scriptures should have the “A” added, then why would you just assume for some reason that it SHOULDN'T also be added in John 1?

    peace and love,
    mike


    Mike.

    In English where there 'a' is mentioned it is not in the Greek. However, it can be interpreted in as 'a' in our understanding too.

    So it is up to the context whether 'a' is added or not.

    e.g., if you say in Greek 'river' without the definite article 'the', then you are talking about rivers in general, or the qualities that make it a river. So you can say “it is like a river', or 'it flows like a river', or next to a 'river'. Notice that you are not identifying the river. If you say “the river”, the question that arises is what river or the name of the river.

    John 8:44 for example says 'THE Devil' (identifier) and 'a murderer' (qualifier/nature/characteristic). Saying a murder is not identifying the murderer. That has already been done where is says THE Devil.

    In Acts 28:6 it says a god. It is not identifying the God but is qualifying him. It's like saying “he is like a professional”. You are not saying “what or which professional” but using it as a qualifier.

    Acts 12:22 is not identifying the God it is really saying is like a god or has the voice like a god and not a man. No identifying going on here either.

    1 Corinthians 8:7 is not identifying the God but is talking of a god.

    Yes sometimes gods are identified. Such as THE God of this age or the name of a particular false God. But where you just see THE God with no context to say otherwise, it is the true God.
    e.g., the Word was with THE God is talking of the true God. The God of this age is talking of the true God of this age which is the Devil.

    I have yet to see a verse that says “THE God” in reference to Jesus or anyone else that has a ministry from God. Rather it is theos used without the definite article and thereby is talking about the ministry, quality, nature, or characteristic of divine nature or divine agenda.

    #225877
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 900
    • Total replies 18,541

    “Irenaeus [in the second century] could still interpret MK. Xiii, 32 in the following manner: the Son confessed not to know that which only the Father knew; hence ' we learn from himself that the Father is over all', as he who is greater also than the Son. But the Nicene theologians had now suddenly to deny that Jesus could have said such a thing about the Son. In the long-recognized scriptural testimony for the Logos-doctrine provided by Prov. Viii, 22 ff. The exegetes of the second and third centuries had found the creation of the preexistent Logos-Christ set forth without dispute and equivocation. But now, when the Arians also interpreted the passage in this way, the interpretation was suddenly reckoned as false…. A theologian such as Tertullian by virtue of his Subordinationist manner of thinking, could confidently on occasion maintain that, before all creation, God the Father had been originally 'alone', and thus there was a time when 'the Son was not'. When he did so, within the Church of his day such a statement did not inevitably provoke a controversy, and indeed there was none about it. But now, when Arius said the same thing in almost the same words, he raised thereby in the Church a mighty uproar, and such a view was condemned as heresy in the anathemas of Nicaea.” e.a.]
    -pp. 155-8. The Formation of Christian Dogma, by Martin Werner, D.D.

    When the writers of the New Testament speak of God they mean the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of him, nor think of him as God. He is God's Christ, God's Son, God's Wisdom, God's Word. Even the prologue to St. John {John 1:1-18} which comes nearest to the Nicene Doctrine, must be read in the light of the pronounced subordinationism of the Gospel as a whole; and the Prologue is less explicit in Greek with the anarthrous theos [the word “god” at John 1:1c without the article] than it appears in English… The adoring exclamation of St. Thomas “my Lord and my god” (Joh. xx. 28) is still not quite the same as an address to Christ as being without qualification [limitation] God, and it must be balanced by the words of the risen Christ himself to Mary Magdalene (verse. 17) “Go unto my brethren and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” Jesus Christ is frequently spoken of in the Ignation Epistles as “our God”, “my God”, but probably never as “God” without qualification.
    – John Martin Creed in The Divinity of Jesus Christ.

    The word for “god” in Greek is QEOS. In John 1:1 the last occurrence of QEOS is called “a predicate noun” or, “a predicate nominative”. Such a noun tells us something about the subject, instead of telling what the subject is doing. This use of QEOS has reference to the subject, the Word, and does not have the article preceding it; it is anarthrous. This indicates that it is not definite. That is to say, it does not tell what position or office or rank the subject (the Word) occupies. The verb HN “was” follows the predicate noun QEOS; this is another factor in identifying QEOS here as qualitative. This discloses the quality or character of the Word. Of course, the gentleman up above disagrees with me, and he has used Moulton and Colwell to buttress his argument. But what have other Grammarians said about this same type of construction? There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite. In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate [noun] is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite.
    -Philip Harner, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92:1, 1973, pp. 85, 7.

    We must, then take Theos, without the article, in the indefinite [“qualitative” would have been a better word choice] sense of a divine nature or a divine being, as distinguished from the definite absolute God [the Father], ho Theos, the authotheos [selfgod] of Origen. Thus the Theos of John [1:1c] answers to “the image of God'' of Paul, Col. 1:15.
    -G. Lucke, “Dissertation on the Logos”, quoted by John Wilson in, Unitarian Principles Confirmed by Trinitarian Testimonies, p. 428.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 8,161 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account